scouse889

Thank goodness the examples pictured above have had the transfers “carefully applied”, as I’d hate to see what they were like had the transfers been applied really sloppily….

I was referring more to the incorrect use of the roof tooling for the first class swallow Mk4s - not only the wrong tooling used but also used the wrong way round, which suggests that a complete lack of attention to any sort of detail at all is the fundamental problem. The wrong interior is just another manifestation of this, albeit less obvious.

I have just received a promotional email from Hattons which states that amongst the features of this new model are "Accurate tooling variations for different coach types and eras". If only that were true.....

Hornby aren’t the best at fitting the correct interior in Mk3 coaches - most of their recent TS releases have the first class 2+1 moulding, the recent FGW buffet had a TGS interior, and so the list goes on. They do have the ‘correct’ tooling for these (albeit based on original 70s/80s seating configuration, but at least the number of seats each side of the vehicle is correct). The recent Mk3 SD XC TFD coaches also appear to have incorrect 2+2 seating in them, and now this on the Mk4s. I guess they modelled the current interior which is correct for GNER Mallard, VTEC and LNER sets but wrong for as built Swallow and un-refurbished GNER.

IIRC, the original Mk4 buffet was worse - that just had the first class 2+1 interior with no representation of the buffet counter!

Isn’t that the wrong interior moulding for the Intercity buffet - didn’t they have 2+1 first class style seating when first introduced, which was changed to standard 2+2 (and the vehicles turned around) in the Mallard refurbishment?

I am sure you are correct. I would be amazed if the new LNER livery didn’t make an appearance as well.

Such a shame on the Swallow set, as there are now different issues reported with the 91, the DVT, and the FOs. At ca £630 for a full set I think I will leave it and hope that things are rectified. I am ever hopeful Hornby will do a 91 in 'as new' condition with the small numbers and no name so I can use that with my rake of blue/grey sleepers and the 43 surrogate DVT. The LNER and TfW coaches that I have purchased do seem good though - definitely an improvement on the originals, especially the TSOE, so pleased with them.

A real shame to hear this. And definitely a retrograde step when there is an issue that Lima catered for (with the same toolings) 20-30 years ago - they produced representations of flush fronts on one or both cabs, depending on the prototype.

Received some of the TfW and LNER Mk4s that I had pre-ordered the other day, and pleased to report they were free of the defects that others have reported (no glue marks round the windows or marks on the bodyside, and so on). I was reading with interest about the potential difference between the reds on 91118 and the LNER Mk4s though. Does anyone have both the loco and coaches/DVT that they would be able to post a picture of here?

They look really nice. Thanks for sharing. I did preorder these rakes in the end as the 67 is ok and it avoids all the issues with the new Hornby 91, so looking forward to receiving mine.

I have one of those locos, you shouldn’t need to swap the whole frame as the buffers are sprung and are a separate part. Contact Bachmann spares direct and they can sort you out. I was sent a buffer with spring FOC when I did exactly the same thing to another of my 37s.

Apologies - indeed, Coach F still to go. At least there is front and back now though!

Sadly they don’t fit the Lima 47, and don’t run well on Hornby models without the tyres…

I have also remembered the same thing happened with the Class 67s - the first runs of R2522 and R2523 were supplied without tyres and the axle packs were X9624, but subsequent production runs of these locos arrived with tyres and the axle pack changed to X9624M. So depending on which run your loco was from, you might get a 67005 or 67027 with or without traction tyres. I bought a few of these locos at the time to use the chassis under Lima bodyshells, and had both. Unlike the 59s, the ex-Lima 67s are all axle drive so the addition of traction tyres to these seemed unnecessary and I have replaced any traction tyre fitted axles on mine with non tyred axles, and they work just fine. The ex-Lima 156s R2511, R2512, and R2513 are further examples - original axle packs X9692 (no tyres), revised X9692M (one axle one wheel tyred).

When the ex-Lima locos were first introduced as part of the Hornby range over a decade ago (Class 59s, R2519, R2520, R2521 and perhaps others) they were not fitted with traction tyres and the replacement axle packs were X9665 (powered bogie) and X9666 (non powered bogie). I presume as the result of adverse feedback regarding pulling power, subsequent locos were supplied fitted with traction tyres and the spare part number for the axle pack for the powered bogie became X9665M (M = modified). For some unknown reason, however, Hornby have started supplying tyre-fitted bogies in axle packs with the code X9665, which are the ones now available from the major spares suppliers, hence the confusion… on RMweb and apparently also at Hornby!

I see the GNER DVT R40147 is now in stock with retailers (so completing the availability of the GNER 225 set). Anyone see one in the flesh?

Hi. Sounds like the horns on your locos are damaged - they should face forwards but the plastic moulding used by Hornby to represent these is so fragile they frequently get bent out of place. I’ve had a number of brand new locos arrive with bits of the horns loose in the box. If you try to rectify it, be very careful, as you risk snapping the horns off altogether, and they are a pain to refit when broken. Westhill Wagon Works do make 3D printed replacements. Good luck!

Indeed, the new LNER livery looks very nice, I see there is a complete trainset with 91127 now. Shame that the shades of red on the LNER 91 and HST don't match.

I just can't help but come back to this - isn't it poor that you need "a thin piece of card (from a Peco track packing) cut into a V shape and placed into the flangeway around the frog" to make a £217.99 MRP loco run smoothly on the manufacturer's own track?! If Hornby want to charge tip-top prices, they should be producing tip-top models. It is obvious they had running issues at the design stage with the model ('beyond the buffers' chat with the designer) and it seems they just haven't rectified them properly - and, as such, they have released a model with a pretty significant design flaw. I really do like these locos and would love one, but the random nature of the running problems being reported coupled with the high price point really does put me off. I've seen them down to the £175 mark so far, so I'll hang on a bit longer I think, and maybe the Flying Scotsman one will have the issue addressed......

Something for Hornby to do in a pack with another 'normal' XC power car as part of their 2023 releases? https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2022/07/photos-crosscountry-high-speed-train-powercar-unveiled-in-new-livery-at-exeter-st-davids.html They might get shot of a few of the SD Mk3s that won't even shift out the bargain bins then as well!

Good excuse for me to buy 37425 though.... I used to see it frequently in both its railfreight construction and RR guises hauling Crewe-Bangor/Holyhead services along the North Wales Coast line. Many a happy memory spent at Llanfairpwll on Anglesey waiting for a 37 to come!! It is nice it has been returned to RR livery - rather like the 91s being repainted in their new LNER livery which takes its inspiration from the original Swallow scheme (how's that for a segway back on topic?!). I would say that I hope that Hornby apply this livery to their model in the future, but I will qualify it by saying I hope that Hornby sort out all the shortcomings with the model and then release this livery on a model with improved running characteristics. Ever the optimist, I hope that when the two 91s announced earlier this year are finally released, they have sorted the issues. At least I could use 91101 on the LNER MkIVs that I have on order.....!

Good knowledge, thanks for that. Unfortunate that you would still need a Class 91 (albeit you would only need a non-powered one) to replicate this working.... :(

Depending on what you want the locos to haul and whether you have gradients, you could consider replacing the wheels with non-tyre fitted ones. I’ve done this on most of the models I have and they still have reasonable haulage on level track - 4 Mk3s and 3 Mk2s on a sleeper rake is the heaviest train I use with them, I think.

The buffer housing is moulded as part of the chassis, so might be possible but with a lot of work.